--- Carrol Cox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jurriaan Bendien wrote:
Dearest Joanna,
I honestly and firmly believe that what you say
here is bunk. But I will do
you the honour of investigating it some more.
After all, one could be wrong,
and language has its limitations, does it not ?
]
Assunto: Re: [PEN-L] Reductionism
Through socratic dialogue and discussion, we
arrived at the conclusion that we all ultimately wanted immortality, even
although we recognised that this was unlikely to happen, at least not in a
realist sense, although we might immortalise ourselves in human memory
There are researching projects on biotechnology about immortality. Some of
these projects appear to be serious.
Renato Pompeu
Well, personally I am not in principle against that, because that could mean
an advancement of human life, which is consistent with my personal vision.
Of course, it
Mm. Lots of metaphorical, associative, and inferential processes in
your propositions above. I won't go
into the problems with the binaries you mention:-)
Agreed. It's just a sketch anyway. Another useful function of metaphors is
to summarise very quickly a theme, topic or problematic
Jurriaan Bendien wrote:
I suppose the ultimate human goal is the realisation
of immortality, i.e. the extension of human life in perpetuity, which
assumes a love of human life, a love of being human in any possible way.
It may be the ultimate egotistic goal, but I don't know that I would call it
-
From: joanna bujes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, August 23, 2003 7:29 PM
Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Reductionism/Immortality
Jurriaan Bendien wrote:
I suppose the ultimate human goal is the realisation
of immortality, i.e. the extension of human life in perpetuity, which
Jurriaan Bendien wrote:
Dearest Joanna,
I honestly and firmly believe that what you say here is bunk. But I will do
you the honour of investigating it some more. After all, one could be wrong,
and language has its limitations, does it not ?
I'm not sure what you are talking about -- and in
I'm not sure what you are talking about -- and in particular, the hotel
allegory is obscure.
Ever deconstructed the word obscure ?
But Homer would have agreed with Joanna. The lives of the gods
(immortals) are meaningless, because it is their mortality that gives
meaning to human lives. We
Anyway, I what you say is corect, and Homer thinks that the lives of the
Gods are meaningless, then why does he keep on writing about them ? What
concept of signification does Homer have ?
If I was to go around Greece saying things like Homer thinks that the lives
of the Gods are meaningless the
It is not odd that a follower of Wittgenstein should attack scientism and
reductionism. While it is true that W. influenced the Vienna Circle, he
never totally agreed with their views nor did they with him. For example
even at the time of the Tractatus W. spoke of there being that of which one
into the paradoxes of formal-logical thought, that Hegel
develops his view about the need for dialectical thought as the only form by
which the particular and the general can be related in a scientific,
rationally adequate way (which of course demolishes reductionism). The
correct conclusion
Though Joe Faith's chapter on Anti-Reductionism is very good, I find that Levins
Lewontin's final chapter in their DIALECTICAL BIOLOGIST is even better.
Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
-Original Message-
From: Jurriaan
and Churchland must come from some other culture that is
trying to invent words that are connected to nothing but your own violations
of English grammar in the interests of reductionism. Brains thinks stinks of
reductionist metaphysics.
Cheers, Ken Hanly
Doyle
I find your point amusing. I read
Hello All,
Jurriaan writes,
...The popularisation of associative, analogic thinking and rapid
communication, as a substitute for systematic theoretisation, particularly
in the social sciences, basically means the forward march of various forms
of pragmatism as the dominant epistemic paradigm. ...
can be related in a scientific,
rationally adequate way (which of course demolishes reductionism). The
correct conclusion of the rejection of Cartesian dualism is therefore
the
need for dialectical thought, not a barren pragmatic art, but an
adequate
re-theoretisation of experience based
Hi Doyle,
You bring up Postmodernism, and your being against associative, analogical
thinking.
I am not against associative, analogical thinking, I just do not pretend
that it is theorising. I have worked in a library where associative thinking
is very important. But I also worked as
http://computing.unn.ac.uk/staff/CGJF1/pdf/ch2.pdf
Hello All,
Reductionism is not a philosophy as much as a practice in parts of science.
However, the method has drawn substantial fire as a philosophy. I am going
to examine one such attack. In this case this is an interesting wide
ranging criticism of not Reductionism but of the established
Title: reductionism vs. radical holism
[was: RE: [PEN-L:31338] Re: RE: Western Rationality]
I wrote:
Lewontin and Levins (in their DIALECTICAL BIOLOGIST) argue against the
Enlightenment version of science. They see the world as heterogeneous,
involving a large number of parts
But, Mine! Isn't football (the real one - ie. the one they play with their
feet) the sport most played by the world's girls and women? And you'd be
living in a strange place indeed if an awful lot of the women weren't just
a tad interested in the men's game, too, I reckon. Women can be as
But, Mine! Isn't football (the real one - ie. the one they play with
their
feet) the sport most played by the world's girls and women? And you'd be
living in a strange place indeed if an awful lot of the women weren't
just
a tad interested in the men's game, too, I reckon. Women can be as
true, indeed! nobody has paid attention to the gender dimension of
baseball so far. may be, it is much better to offer a middle ground
solution since capitalism is a "gendered" social system by definition. so
we can still "engender" baseball according to class. what class of men has
a tendecy to
The linking between baseball and capitalism in pen-l have been a bit
reductionist for my tastes.
I shall not go on about the social processes around baseball but it is,
today, likely as much a engenderization process (teaching boys "how to be
men" - and occasional girls too) as much as anything
23 matches
Mail list logo
